[GIT PULL] ARM: ixp4xx: fixes for v3.7

[GIT PULL] ARM: ixp4xx: fixes for v3.7

[Jason Cooper]

The following changes since commit f4a75d2eb7b1e2206094b901be09adb31ba63681:

  Linux 3.7-rc6 (2012-11-16 17:42:40 -0800)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git tags/ixp4xx_fixes_for_3.7

for you to fetch changes up to 0d2c9f0517e915ce03a04e91d3207827e0d274a8:

  IXP4xx: use __iomem for MMIO (2012-11-22 03:36:45 +0000)

----------------------------------------------------------------
ixp4xx fixes for v3.7

----------------------------------------------------------------
Arnd Bergmann (1):
      IXP4xx: use __iomem for MMIO

Krzysztof Haasa (9):
      IXP4xx: Fix Goramo MultiLink platform compilation.
      IXP4xx: Fix off-by-one bug in Goramo MultiLink platform.
      IXP4xx: HW pseudo-random generator is available on IXP45x/46x only.
      IXP4xx: ixp4xx_crypto driver requires Queue Manager and NPE drivers.
      IXP4xx: Remove time limit for PCI TRDY to enable use of slow devices.
      WAN: Remove redundant HDLC info printed by IXP4xx HSS driver.
      IXP4xx crypto: MOD_AES{128,192,256} already include key size.
      IXP4xx: Always ioremap() Queue Manager MMIO region at boot.
      IXP4xx: map CPU config registers within VMALLOC region.

Tim Gardner (1):
      ixp4xx: Declare MODULE_FIRMWARE usage

 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/common-pci.c               |  1 +
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/common.c                   | 13 +++----
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/goramo_mlr.c               |  3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/include/mach/debug-macro.S |  4 +--
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/include/mach/ixp4xx-regs.h | 46 ++++++++++---------------
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/include/mach/qmgr.h        | 12 +++----
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/ixp4xx_npe.c               |  9 ++++-
 arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/ixp4xx_qmgr.c              | 12 +------
 drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig                  |  6 ++--
 drivers/char/hw_random/ixp4xx-rng.c             |  5 ++-
 drivers/crypto/Kconfig                          |  2 +-
 drivers/crypto/ixp4xx_crypto.c                  | 12 +++----
 drivers/net/wan/ixp4xx_hss.c                    |  2 +-
 13 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)

[GIT PULL] ARM: ixp4xx: fixes for v3.7

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thursday 22 November 2012, Jason Cooper wrote:
> The following changes since commit f4a75d2eb7b1e2206094b901be09adb31ba63681:
> 
>   Linux 3.7-rc6 (2012-11-16 17:42:40 -0800)
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git tags/ixp4xx_fixes_for_3.7
> 
> for you to fetch changes up to 0d2c9f0517e915ce03a04e91d3207827e0d274a8:
> 
>   IXP4xx: use __iomem for MMIO (2012-11-22 03:36:45 +0000)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ixp4xx fixes for v3.7
> 

I've merged them into the fixes branch now, thanks a lot for following
up on these patches!

Olof, I'm undecided whether they are still appropriate for 3.7 since
we're past the final -rc now. If we want them in, we should probably
send them to Linus now and let him decide.  For all I can tell, ixp4xx
is already completely broken without these patches, so there should be
no harm in including them, but then again " 13 files changed, 59
insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)" is slightly more than I'd like to send
at this point.

If you prefer, we can put them into next/fixes-non-critical, but then we
might want to mark more of them as candidates for stable.

	Arnd

[GIT PULL] ARM: ixp4xx: fixes for v3.7

[Olof Johansson]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:14 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Thursday 22 November 2012, Jason Cooper wrote:
>> The following changes since commit f4a75d2eb7b1e2206094b901be09adb31ba63681:
>>
>>   Linux 3.7-rc6 (2012-11-16 17:42:40 -0800)
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>
>>   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git tags/ixp4xx_fixes_for_3.7
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to 0d2c9f0517e915ce03a04e91d3207827e0d274a8:
>>
>>   IXP4xx: use __iomem for MMIO (2012-11-22 03:36:45 +0000)
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> ixp4xx fixes for v3.7
>>
>
> I've merged them into the fixes branch now, thanks a lot for following
> up on these patches!

Ah yes, my bad, I had forgotten about this pull request.

> Olof, I'm undecided whether they are still appropriate for 3.7 since
> we're past the final -rc now. If we want them in, we should probably
> send them to Linus now and let him decide.  For all I can tell, ixp4xx
> is already completely broken without these patches, so there should be
> no harm in including them, but then again " 13 files changed, 59
> insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)" is slightly more than I'd like to send
> at this point.
>
> If you prefer, we can put them into next/fixes-non-critical, but then we
> might want to mark more of them as candidates for stable.

Since the code has been broken for quite a while, I don't see a big
urgency to get it in in the last week of a new release, but I can
easily be persuaded differently. Had I done the pull, I would probably
have merged them into fixes-non-critical myself.

But, as I said, I don't have strong opinions on the matter. :)


-Olof

[GIT PULL] ARM: ixp4xx: fixes for v3.7

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Monday 26 November 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:

> > Olof, I'm undecided whether they are still appropriate for 3.7 since
> > we're past the final -rc now. If we want them in, we should probably
> > send them to Linus now and let him decide.  For all I can tell, ixp4xx
> > is already completely broken without these patches, so there should be
> > no harm in including them, but then again " 13 files changed, 59
> > insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)" is slightly more than I'd like to send
> > at this point.
> >
> > If you prefer, we can put them into next/fixes-non-critical, but then we
> > might want to mark more of them as candidates for stable.
> 
> Since the code has been broken for quite a while, I don't see a big
> urgency to get it in in the last week of a new release, but I can
> easily be persuaded differently. Had I done the pull, I would probably
> have merged them into fixes-non-critical myself.

I've just done a few pulls that I've found in my email backlog, but it
seems you already had everything under control, I was expecting more
work to be left over. I probably woudn't have started if I had known
it was this little. At least I have a good feeling about not having
missed anything important now.
 
> But, as I said, I don't have strong opinions on the matter. :)

I can send the pull request(s) for the fixes this time, so at least
Linus doesn't blame you for what I pulled in ;-)

	Arnd

[GIT PULL] ARM: ixp4xx: fixes for v3.7

[Olof Johansson]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Monday 26 November 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
>
>> > Olof, I'm undecided whether they are still appropriate for 3.7 since
>> > we're past the final -rc now. If we want them in, we should probably
>> > send them to Linus now and let him decide.  For all I can tell, ixp4xx
>> > is already completely broken without these patches, so there should be
>> > no harm in including them, but then again " 13 files changed, 59
>> > insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)" is slightly more than I'd like to send
>> > at this point.
>> >
>> > If you prefer, we can put them into next/fixes-non-critical, but then we
>> > might want to mark more of them as candidates for stable.
>>
>> Since the code has been broken for quite a while, I don't see a big
>> urgency to get it in in the last week of a new release, but I can
>> easily be persuaded differently. Had I done the pull, I would probably
>> have merged them into fixes-non-critical myself.
>
> I've just done a few pulls that I've found in my email backlog, but it
> seems you already had everything under control, I was expecting more
> work to be left over. I probably woudn't have started if I had known
> it was this little. At least I have a good feeling about not having
> missed anything important now.
>
>> But, as I said, I don't have strong opinions on the matter. :)
>
> I can send the pull request(s) for the fixes this time, so at least
> Linus doesn't blame you for what I pulled in ;-)

Haha, ok, deal.


-Olof